Post A Reply
my profile
login
|
register
|
search
|
faq
|
forum home
»
Allstocks.com's Bulletin Board
»
Off-Topic Post, Non Stock Talk
»
Freedom of Speech in this country... Not anymore....
» Post A Reply
Post A Reply
Login Name:
Password:
Message Icon:
Message:
HTML is enabled.
UBB Code™ is enabled.
[QUOTE]Originally posted by Machiavelli: [QB] [QUOTE]Originally posted by SeekingFreedom: [qb] It just didn't mention how the monthly membership fee was collected. Hence my original question as to credit card vs pay pal.[/qb][/QUOTE]Correct me if I am wrong but with PayPal don't you need a credit card and/or bank account? I know I did when I opened one years ago though I haven't used PP in a long time. [QUOTE][qb]Oddly enough, Mach, I did. They don't diminish my point in the least. Without a solidly defined definition to work with, the legal definition used for prosecuting it is largely based on local MAJORITY opinion. What is ok in a 'red-light' district in some areas is way off limits in most of suburbia. [b]And even though you like to believe Majority rules that is not the case always.[/b] Whether through action or apathy, majority ALWAYS rules.[/qb][/QUOTE]Obviously the Majority didn't rule in the Mormon Porno/Obscenity case because the judge and/or jury in that case disagreed with the prosecutors and people like you. [QUOTE][qb]Yes, we are. What is your point?[/qb][/QUOTE]I'll let you ponder that one. [QUOTE][qb]Once again, oddly enough I did read your article. While I disagree with the conclusion the defense drew from records from a hotel in which many people from many areas stay to say that it must mean that mormons were the ones viewing porn; I don't argue that there area some that do. The Mormon Church isn't an exclusive club for the perfect. It's a group rehab for the imperfect who don't want to stay that way.[/qb][/QUOTE]Imperfect in your opinion perhaps but imperfect is different for everyone. I can see why people were so concerned about Romney running for Prez. He probably would not of separated Church from State. [QUOTE][qb]As for the majority thing, you should check your stats before making blanket statements like that. http://www.sltrib.com/ci_2886596 "Professor Tim Heaton, who studies LDS demographics for church-owned Brigham Young University, says the county numbers probably come from church membership rolls, and that between half and one-third of those people are not active in the faith. If that's true, then, at most, 41.6 percent of Utahns are church-going Mormons. " We have been the minority for a while now and continue to drop back as an overall percentage of the population. As such is the case, that means that more and more decisions will be made that may not fully reflect the desires of the Church membership. Again, simple group dynamics at work.[/qb][/QUOTE]Who cares if they are church going or not they are still Mormons. My parents do not go to Church at all but consider themselves Catholics <shrugs>. Me, I don't know where i fall with my "faith" but that doesn't matter. But anyways perhaps the Mormons aren't the Majority in Utah anymore but they certainly are the Power in Utah. [QUOTE][qb]Fantasies are what you'd like to do if there were no consequences to doing it. By encouraging this kind of forum, she is just strengthening the appetite for it. Sooner or later, someone will act no matter how 'noble' her intentions.[/qb][/QUOTE]What you seem to not get is that if someone has the intention of hurting a child a story/movie/music etc. is not the source. That is inside a person. They may give the person a method of harming a child but not the original idea. If a sicko comes up with his own method or copies a method the end result is still the same. Censoring such works will not prevent a sicko from doing what he wants. Censorship only prevents artistic works from being expressed. Who knows Big Brother might say in the future the works of Mormons fall into this and be censored. That is the point. Where does it end? Nowhere because there will always be someone offended by every written word. Like I said right now it is Red Rose then next Stephen King (Horror), Anne Rice(Erotica/Horror), Salinger, De Sade etc. [QUOTE][qb]Then just as a passing suggestion...attack the institution not those of us who claim to belong to them. You can just as easily wait until I (or anyone else) posts something you disagree with and THEN flame us. Looks more objective than assuming you know what we MIGHT post and pre-emptively flaming. :) [quote][qb] Noted. I just attack a representation of the institution. But anyways post something that I disagree with so i can flame you then lol jk [quote][qb]Freedom means different things to different people. Maybe we'll cover it in another thread. [/qb][/QUOTE]Typical GOPer lol jk... Anyways a couple of things: 1. The Red Rose depicts fictional child rape and/or murder. What about newspapers that report the news in graphic detail? Wouldn't it be considered "obscene" by your definition and give a sicko the idea to do such things same as RR? And if so why preferential treatment for one (media) and not the other (fictional) if both describe more or less the same things. 2. Forget what you think is obscene or not etc. Ask yourself if she had gone to trial would she had prevailed? Now remember no obscenity case has been tried much less convicted in decades. Also the Feds probably chose this case knowing about her "condition" and that the probable ending would be that she would plead guilty. But forget that, let's assume she didn't have that condition and went to trial. Do you really think this case would of ended in conviction? [/QB][/QUOTE]
Instant Graemlins
Instant UBB Code™
What is UBB Code™?
Options
Disable Graemlins in this post.
*** Click here to review this topic. ***
Contact Us
|
Allstocks.com Message Board Home
© 1997 - 2021 Allstocks.com. All rights reserved.
Powered by
Infopop Corporation
UBB.classic™ 6.7.2